Watching the VP debate, I thought Palin was hanging on for dear life. And Biden was excellent. Biden was clear and direct, I think he got through to people. I hope he gets some more media attention after this.

Sarah Palin... She didn't fall down, pass out, or puke, good for her. But her responses were absolutely awful!! After about an hour I couldn't stand her anymore. Message to Sarah, if you can't answer the question please stop talking!!!!! The longest rambling responses came when she avoided questions. I could not resist smothering my head with a pillow and leaving the room during her 3 minute nonsensical answers. Finally we couldn't help muting her 3-4 times. I was screaming at Gwen Eiffel to make her stop. We liked Sarah more with the sound off.

Biden on the other hand got about 10 hell-yea's from us. Creating jobs by investing in Infrastructure and greener technologies that we can export! Healthcare at the top of the list. Sincere diplomacy to restore our standing in the world, and achieve peace. 3 weeks in Iraq = the entire Afghanistan budget so far. Epic failures of letting the market "run wild" Restoring the Middle Class!

Biden gets an A+ he could even teach Obama some things about being more direct and unequivocal in his responses. Palin gets a D-, what American was comforted by her responses?

It is definitely believable that a significant portion of the people watching last night already knew what they would think after it was over. In this sense it was like a sporting event. This is sort of why I have been avoiding the topic. It is very easy for anyone to discover factual inaccuracies and misstatements during these debates and in speeches, but the fact of the matter is that nobody is interested in substance. That much has been made more than obvious over the past couple of months. So I say screw it, let the country burn. That's about where I'm at.

dcoffee writes at 11:05:05 10/03/08 - Comment #39611

Yea, if you think the country is close to a meltdown, and you want a new New Deal, you might have gained some faith in the Democratic Party. Not sure if the Republicans gained anything. Palin looked like some college Republicans president. With the sound off, she looked like a local news anchor.

joshua writes at 10:43:23 10/03/08 - Comment #39605

Well, if we are talking about applauding flat out liberal boilerplate, then I suppose there is something to be happy about. These people are making promises that won't come true. And lets be honest Dave - there is nothing that could have come out of Sarah Palin's mouth that would have made you happy. I predicted this journal entry would happen!

Bush announces a $700 billion bailout plan. To put that in perspective, the Iraq War so far, over 6 years, has cost around $500 billion. Add the bailout to the $400-$500 billion spent so far on the financial sector, it's over a trillion dollars. The national debt is $9.5 trillion dollars. If all goes as planned, the debt will be over $11 trillion. That's big.

Remember how Bush wanted to privatize Social Security? Put our retirement in the stock market for 'safe keeping', imagine if that would have passed.

This deregulation nonsense has been going on for decades. The New Deal and consumer protections have slowly disappeared. Clinton, Bush, Regan, Nixon, Carter, LBJ, there's a lot of blame to go around. There have been plenty of warning signs too, Enron, the savings and loan crisis, housing bubbles, etc. But still the "Free Market" has been worshiped like some kind miracle that will fix all of our problems.

The Free Market is dead. Good Riddance.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were government agencies created during the New Deal. Privatized under LBJ to balance the budget, deregulated in future years, now we're paying for what they screwed up.

Investment Banks and Commercial Banks used to be separate. This made our money more secure by keeping it away from risky business. Under Clinton, that changed. Now our banks are floating our money in the stock market. If we all wanted to get our money out of our bank, it wouldn't be there, the bank would go bankrupt.

Debt, that's a new trend too. If you wanted a mortgage you used to need to put 25% down, no matter what. Now all you need is the closing costs to 'buy' a house. Credit Cards were basically invented in the 50s and 60s. Now people don't save any money, really America has a negative savings rate. We just make payments, forever... it's the new serfdom, we're all indentured servants.

Railroads, Airlines, Energy, all deregulated, all in trouble. Taxpayers had to pay for Enron, we had to bail out airlines. And trains have been replaced by trucks that hog oil, wear down our roads, and clog our streets.

Why don't we just privatize the Water systems, schools, Social Security, and healthcare too? Leave it up to the invisible hand of the market.

This crap doesn't save us any money, or make us any better off in the long run.

If the government screws up, we vote them out, impeach them, or put them on trial. If the stock market eats our life savings, the companies fold, and we lose everything, maybe a couple people go to jail, but most of the executives get a fat check from a company that they helped bankrupt. And we don't get our money back, unless it's insured by FDIC, a government program from the New Deal.

So Who thinks reducing government regulation of the economy was a good thing? Don't you feel better off now?

The government is corrupt. Money is power, not People. Politicians went along with this crap because it was in their own self interest.

Government has been demonized for the wrong reasons. It's not the regulations and taxes that are the problem. It's the Corruption. It's the influence of money, and the disregard for the welfare of average people.

The perfect example of where deregulation just made life miserable for everyone is the airline industry. We would be so much better off if routes were still regulated. Small cities would still have mandated service and the congestion that we see would not be as bad at certain airports. Yea, you can say that there would be higher prices, but in the end we still ended up paying higher prices even if you don't choose curbside check in and check that extra bag.

Let me add another example to that list, my mother had to declare bankruptcy because of a medical bill. And she had her tax refund taken every year to pay off her student loans from UB.

Back in the 60s you could raise a family of 8 kids with just one parent working a job as a trucker. That's what happened in my mom's family. Now most people can't raise a family half that size working 2 or 3 jobs. It's because they have so many expenses. Healthcare, childcare, gas, food, insurance, school, retirement. The government does less, and my expenses are higher.

I don't see any evidence that the Free Market, and deregulation have done us any good. All I see is people working more and getting less for it. The government just got out of the way so that private companies can squeeze every last dime out of us. In fact they're even taking money we don't have, or haven't earned yet, through loans.

The interest rates on student Loans have only gone up since I was in college. What if your parents can't afford to pay your college? You start your working life with a huge amount of debt $25 - $70 thousand, even before the credit card and the mortgage. And why do we go to college? To get a decent job with a good starting salary. Even though anyone will tell you that it's more important to be happy doing what you like than making a lot of money. But you have to pay $300 on your loans every month. So why bother studying Political Science and trying to make a difference in the world, when you got bills to pay.

Inequality in this country is at the worst level since the great depression, where the bottom 90% of America only posses 20% of the wealth :::link:::

We need government intervention to fix this mess. Adam Smith was full of crap. And we need to do more than buy Wall Streets problems and mortgage our future.

libertad writes at 09:50:50 09/21/08 - Comment #39084

I have always hated Adam Smith and his "invisible hand". Sounds good in theory but as we can see in practice it really isn't working. It might work for some for a while but eventually government will have to step in to clean up the mess.

I'm really surprised that the bailout plan will supersede the cost of the Iraq war up to this point. I think you are right, it would have been better to help individuals in a program designed to help them save their homes and credit rather than just bail out the banks. My sister is one of the people who had her home foreclosed on. What happened was that after her divorce she couldn't afford the house she lived in so she tried to sell it but without anyone ever looking at it because of the housing crisis. Her only option was to let the banks foreclose. Now her credit is screwed and I worry that if she ever had to find an apartment that she would be denied. It really is not such a good situation for her or for anybody really.

I also feel like an indentured servant in a way. My student loans severely hinder my options and career path. Just recently, I decided to not apply to a job that would be perfect for me but it interfered with my ability to make even more money elsewhere at least in the short term. I work really hard to pay my bills and then there is little left over. I don't even have money to buy things like boots and a decent coat for the winter. The government hasn't bailed me out. My student loan interest rates are locked in forever. Bankruptcy is not an option on student loans, they will haunt you for the rest of your life. I borrowed the money and I will pay it back, but I just wish that I was better off for going to get an education rather than worse off. I worked the entire time I was in school but it wasn't enough so I had to take out the loans. I never used those loans for vacations or clothes or used it frivolously.

There is this idea that if you work really hard you can pull yourself up and achieve this so called American dream. I just don't really think that is true. People might say well you could have just gotten a degree in this or that and be fine but look at how much things have changed. My father and grandfather raised families of 5 and 7 respectively with high school diplomas and both did very well. Now my father went back to school with a degree in math and computers and is struggling to support just himself. I don't even know if he will ever be able to retire. He went from raising a family of five, living on Long Island with an in ground pool to not being able to retire. He has worked harder than anyone I have ever known and now he is stuck not because of his lack of a will but because that is the cards he was dealt.

dcoffee writes at 10:26:32 09/20/08 - Comment #39076

Here's a good way to put the Wall St bailout in perspective. $700 billion means $2,293 per person. Every man woman and child in America would pay that much. That is a lot of cash. How can we afford that? Sounds pretty extreme to me.

tinypliny writes at 09:25:19 09/20/08 - Comment #39075

I am not sure that a concept of pure democracy can ever co-exist with capitalism.

We've been watching the government use hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in order to bail out huge irresponsible corporations that made bad bets in an under-regulated stock market. The CEOs of these corporations still get paid despite the damage they've done. They'll keep their pensions, while the rest of us are losing our life savings. We taxpayers now own their crappiest investments and worst decisions, because we just propped them up by buying their debt with some national debt, even though we already have $9 trillion worth.

This offends me on so many levels.

Here's one point that few are mentioning.

Why are these companies suddenly going bankrupt? Because Americans can't pay their debts. The Loans and mortgages aren't being repaid. Why can't Americans pay? Because the housing bubble popped, and people's homes are now worth less than their mortgages they owe. Or people got varriable rate morgages, now they can't afford the interest. So people are going bankrupt and losing their homes in record numbers.

People leave those homes empty, and declare bankruptcy, they have no good options. People got screwed, so the banks are no longer getting all that money they were promised. So.... now the banks are screwed.

Suddenly the government is willing to shovel cash at rich people who mad terrible choices and led their companies into the ground. But when average Americans lost their homes, we called it a Handout, rewarding people who made bad decisions.

Now it's Wall St, and we call it a Bailout, stabilizing the economy. Well, if you'd helped people stay in their homes and pay their debts, this never would have reached Wall St. Why should the middle class bail out Wall St after we were left to fend for ourselves when we were in trouble.

Anybody know how much money the government has put toward helping citizens overcome the housing crisis? I'll bet it's less than $400 billion. But that's what us citizens has given to Wall St over the past year.

I heard today that the Palindrone/Crypt-keeper duo might possibly win this November. I am scared to think of what might happen then. The whole Alaskan glacier will probably disintegrate due to drilling, America will go to war with a bunch of European countries because it's after all a "mission from God" Himself, abortions will be banned so teenagers and women can die from illegal and unsafe abortions or go to Mexico or Canada to get one, all the dissidents will be fired from all government and public-service posts and nepotism will be the law of the land, health-care will be increasingly taxed and insurance premiums will go up for the average American, people without insurance - who gives a damn about them anyway?, money will be pulled from research and there will be a mass exodus of scientists to Europe and Asia (Singapore and China, in particular), Creationism will be the ONLY doctrine and Science will be terribly unpopular as a subject, the Church will fuse with the government and start witch-hunting once again... ... The possibilities are endless. How exciting.

tinypliny writes at 09:08:00 09/19/08 - Comment #39052

Wrong priorities. :/ What IS up with all this totally random selfish decisions? Don't people of America have any say in these? How could you let this happen? Why aren't there protests and demonstrations of indignation?

dcoffee writes at 08:44:54 09/19/08 - Comment #39047

Speaking of Oil, here's an article on the recent energy bill. An all of the above approach, that also took away the subsidies to Oil companies. It didn't pass because Republicans didn't like the idea of saving $18 billion per year by getting rid of the tax breaks for oil companies. :::link:::

tinypliny writes at 08:20:46 09/19/08 - Comment #39046

This viewpoint is so infuriating. It really makes me think that the government in this country is only after oil of nations around the world for personal gain of a few and now is shovelling all the hard-earned money of the average American into the hands of the few rich ones who probably also were responsible for the whole oil grabbing lying scheme in the first place. :/ Depressing.

What does it say about someone when they repeat a lie over and over again in front of the American people? Especially when that person is trying to get those same people to vote for them. Especially when they're running for the highest office in the land.

McCain, Palin, and the Republicans don't respect democracy, they don't respect you, they think we're a bunch of gullible morons.

They Lie about Obama's tax plan, healthcare plan, energy plan and his voting record. They lie about the bridge to nowhere. They lie about their record, and they say one thing while their actions tell us the opposite.

The Republicans are on record saying facts and issues don't matter, people vote for a composite image of the candidate. Ok, and you're going to build that image with lies? Excuse me, but elections are NOT a fucking game.

This country is in dire straights, but Republicans would rather win an election than offer solutions. Straight talk my ass.

Tell me if Obama, or his campaign has lied about McCain and Palin. I can find false internet rumors, but nothing from the actual Obama Campaign.

The media should call a lie when they see one. There aren't always two sides to a story. Journalists need to set the record straight, and realize that lies are not just a matter of opinion. I've noticed some indications that they may start doing more fact checking, if they don't, they fail.

You know, I do find that aspect quite refreshing in your country. As a people collectively, you are very honest. I can see how lies come as a shock.

But your current president's been lying for nearly a decade now along with his former PM crony B.grade.Liar across the pond.

dcoffee writes at 11:09:25 09/11/08 - Comment #38833

Another AP article, very blunt about McCain and Palin's Lies. :::link::: The media seems to be reacting, I even saw something mentioned briefly on ABC Nightly news.

But I wonder if Americans are so cynical that we expect politicians to lie. Will people be as outraged as me, or will they just call him a maverick for trying to pull off a big lie? I mean, personally when somebody lies to me in a speech or advertisement, I feel like they're calling me an asshole. "You're an asshole with shit for brains, vote for me". We sue companies for false advertisement, what's different here?

I really have been looking for Obama BS too, I can't find much, all I got are statistics that are slightly exaggerated, or just using the median and calling it the 'average', or using 'working families' income to exclude gains at the top. As the old saying goes, "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics" Obama works the statistics, McCain/Palin use Damn Lies, even after people call them on it.

dcoffee writes at 12:03:33 09/11/08 - Comment #38786

Starting to Backfire. I think it's cause Obama used the term.. (Gasp! quick, hide the children) "Lie"
Here's the new Obama Ad :::link:::

(e:DCoffee) - Did I mention how much I love the Fact Check site? They fact check everyone. Not that too many here will be interested, but they fact checked Obama as well. I was surprised to see that they apply some Glade to the flatulence emanating from the blogosphere. This may be the only really trustworthy body of information we have at the moment.

I don't know how people who cried bloody murder when the Republicans labeled them traitors and such ("Dissent is Patriotic!") can reconcile their hyperbole with that earlier indignant stance. Either it is a case of "turnabout is fair play" where they don't really believe it but want to use it to hurt people politically, or they are unconsciously being hypocritical. As you can see on the Fact Check site, this is not a partisan problem.

And have any of you noticed that the high minded talk of Obama, talking about national unity, and for the bitterness to end, is inspiring almost nobody? I only say "almost" because that is change that I believe in. I've changed my personal behavior in the past few years due to this belief. I know that people who disagree with me have the best interests of the country at heart in most circumstances. Obama's campaign is *clean* as far as I'm concerned when it comes to this, but I think that's about where it stops.

jim writes at 03:24:48 09/10/08 - Comment #38748

Even beyond that Drew, when the lies are exposed they redouble their efforts to put the lie out there and pretend like they're being attacked out of bounds personally instead of being called out for what they're peddling.

I'm not saying it's a Republican thing to do that, but it sure is the McCain/Palin way of operating.

joshua writes at 02:57:56 09/10/08 - Comment #38747

I'm 100% sure you feel the way you do and are not lying about it, but really... saying that McCain, Palin and Republicans don't respect democracy is hyperbole and I suspect that your intense interest in the race is getting the better of you. If you react with outrage at hyperbole such as "liberals are unpatriotic and hate America" I would expect that you would reject the use of similar hyperbole.

drew writes at 02:27:59 09/10/08 - Comment #38744

What has really surprised me is that most of the time when the lies are exposed, not only do the lies continue, but the supporters of the liars don't care!

dcoffee writes at 01:50:54 09/10/08 - Comment #38743

PS, I didn't vote yesterday in the local Dem primary. Getting 4 negative adds in my mailbox daily just turned me off. I was busy, why should I go out of my way to support that crap.

I thought Palin delivered her speech very well. She will probably be an asset after all. Seems like she might help the Republicans keep some of their usual voters, I think she shored up the base a bit. She looked like a normal kind of person who supports all of the conservative principles. Kind of makes the party look like it's not just for billionaires.

The conventions are basically a string of monologues, speeches in front of sympathetic crowds. It's much more difficult when you have someone questioning your assertions in a debate, press conference or interview.

The thing that bugs me about the Republicans, at least the ones who get the most attention, is that they don't respect the truth. And when they get up in front of the TV cameras and distort the facts, they are insulting the American people. Say whatever it takes to get elected, turn the elections into lip service, the goal is to win, who cares how you get there.

I watched Romney, Giuliani, Huckabee, some of Lieberman, and Palin. I knew what was bullshit, but not everyone does. I was happy to find this article from the AP when I woke up, At least to AP noticed it too.

Here's an AP fact check of Palin's speech, and some other statements:

And a few debunked claims from Liberman and Fred Thompson:

I want to take people to court who lie to the American people like this.

I don't remember the Democratic speakers distorting McCain's record this badly. If I missed something please let me know. McCain may have opposed Bush in the past, but he's changed his mind on everything from torture to tax cuts.

I may have painted Republicans with too broad a brush though, considering Lieberman was one of the worst.

joshua writes at 04:31:11 09/04/08 - Comment #38572

PS - I didn't notice your complaints of the structure of conventions last week.

joshua writes at 04:30:43 09/04/08 - Comment #38571

I can't believe that you'd accuse Republicans of doing what Obama has been doing for the past month.

drew writes at 09:57:36 09/04/08 - Comment #38534

I caught a couple lies, too.

They did what they do well, though. Maybe the election won't be the blow-out I thought it would be.

Police State Now!
At the RNC convention the Police FBI and Sheriffs departments are PREEMPTIVELY arresting journalists and activists who are connected to any and all protests in St Paul. They are arresting people without court approval and holding them on Conspiricy charges, which means they have 36 hours to get evidence against them before they have to let them go.

Pre-emptive Raids? That means breaking into a house and storming into the room with automatic weapons drawn (no bullshit) where peaceful activists are planning protests. Before the activists even set foot in the streets.

independent Journalists are a common target, video and photo equipment is confiscated, erased, and kept for a few days to prevent journalists from exercising their constitutional duty.

This is so extreme that 3 of the top people from the Democracy Now! were detained, including Amy Goodman. For those who may not know, Democracy Now! is independent journalism at its finest, the forerunners of Pacifica radio, and also on TV. They ask the difficult questions, they are always professional, and they get eyewitness interviews from inside jails and conflict zones, their reputation and huge network of independent journalists means they get the critical stories and perspectives that mainstream media misses. The one thing they stand up for above all else is the rights of journalists and average people to know what their government is doing and respond to it, without fear of arrest, injury or death. They have saved many journalist's lives and reputations worldwide, over the years simply shedding light on the injustice of their detention.

Now the challenges of journalists in America are apparently the worst in a generation.

How did the DNC handle the protests there? Well they faced some problems too. Many of the police in Denver were not wearing name tags, a way to avoid persecution for excessive force and other violations. There was a huge free, Rage Against the Machine concert that kicked off a protest march that was determined to enter the convention and read a list of demands from the floor. Tear gas was ready to fly outside the convention as it already had in previous days, but the Obama campaign came out and spoke to the leaders of the protest and treated them with dignity. Crisis avoided. And though it was a small gesture, it did a lot for Obama's credibility among the activists who would likely protest again in November by voting for Independent Parties.

God Hates Republicans
What other conclusion can you make? A hurricane on the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, that forces their convention to do improv. But the hurricane was not fierce enough to allow republicans to grandstand during the search and rescue effort. The levees barely held. The whole event just served to remind people that Katrina was a whole 3 years ago, and New Orleans is still a disaster.

Republicans trying to out Democrat the Democrats
This is the fun part. McCain finally picks a VP, Sarah Palin, she comes out and appears on the national stage with him for the first time. During that event, both republicans tried to use Democratic talking points as their own. McCain within the first minute of the speech "you want your government to understand what you're going through, to stand on your side and fight for you. That's what I intend to do" I also notice McCain is trying to look like a man of the people more by abandoning the suit and tie, and using a loose button up shirt more often.

Palin's speech was almost a parody of the DNC. She talks first about her family one by one, then her roots as an average schmo in Alaska, before thanking Hillary Clinton and trying to sound like a feminist. And she ends the speech with this "The next 67 days I'm going to take our campaign to every part of our country and our message of reform to every voter of every background, in every political party, or no party at all. If you want change in Washington, if you hope for a better America, then we're asking for your vote on the 4th of November."

I have to laugh, and cheer a bit about this whole thing. The DNC pulled the rug out from under a host of traditional republican issues. Like the faith based free market economy. Trickle Down economics. Tax cuts for the top. Bankrupt the government it's my money. Me first, everyone else fend for yourselves. And foreign policy, reminding us who abandoned an unfinished war in Afghanistan to go fight for some geopolitical pipe dream in Iraq.

I had a feeling that we could change the debate this year. All the energy of the Democrats and progressives determined to turn this country around. An excellent, empathetic leader and speaker like Obama. And the limitless evidence, given to us over the past 8 years, of the failure of the conservative philosophy. All these things create an opportunity to move away from wedge issues, and toward a government that does its job. A government that plans for the future, invites public participation, and maximizes the potential of every American, so that as a country we rise together.

The Liberal philosophy is a patriotic one, I've been talking about it for years. Finally Liberals are not ashamed of their ideas, they used the DNC to show America what we stand for. And America liked it :) They liked it so much, that the McCain campaign freaked out and started trying to turn a man who owns 7 houses, into a man of the people, a working class hero. It realy makes me a little giddy. Probably a good move, but I doubt it will save the Republican Party.

You know more people watched Obama's speech than the Olympics opening ceremonies, and the American Idol finale. In fact there are only 4 football games including the super bowl that got higher ratings this year.
Also Focus on the Family asks people to pray for rain during Obama's speech, no goal, republicans not on God's good side.

It will be interesting to see the RNC, and what happens with their VP choice, much info coming out now. But at least it's entertaining.

Thanks Josh, "No decent person would want unreasonable and perhaps illegal conduct to be a detriment to her regardless of what she believes." I'm glad you posted again, and glad I held off my response, because that is exactly the point. At first you sounded like you were abandoning the Constitution in favor of "law and order", and that really makes my blood boil. let us never forget that the power of government must be limited. As Americans we are fortunate to be ignorant of life under tyranny, but respect for the Constitution is all that saves us.

I know I already posted this link, but I'm telling you, it will answer most of your questions regarding what actually happened. This is not YouTube, it goes to the Democracy Now website, you can watch all of their shows for free. :::link:::

You will find in the first 20 minutes of the 9/2 show, a detailed account of what happened provided by all three journalists who were arrested.

And I must backup Democracy Now's credibility, it's not a bunch of liberal opinion pundits. It's closer to Jim Lehrer than it is to Ed Schultz or Keith Olbermann. The only bias is in what stories they decide to cover, not the way they are covered.

hope the video fills in some of the gray area for you both.

joshua writes at 02:27:22 09/03/08 - Comment #38489

I shouldn't ever promise last posts...

I realized based on your reaction that I should clarify that I don't particularly care about Amy Goodman's politics when it comes to this subject. No decent person would want unreasonable and perhaps illegal conduct to be a detriment to her regardless of what she believes. For me the point is simple, perhaps cold. I want to know what happened, period. Amy Goodman's video is one piece of the puzzle and I'm not going to indict the police when we STILL do not know the reason for the arrests.

As for the crunchy granolas - I love them too despite my opinions on their politics. Like I said to my brother last week - it is time to get nervous when the dissenting voices actually go quiet. It may surprise you to hear that I think dissent is patriotic. It just has to be within the rules and people should not be making assumptions regarding the law and how it is applied. Mistakes like that create a hell of a lot of conjecture and at the speed of the Internet that can seriously muddy the waters. Right now people are doubtless speculating incorrectly about the application of the law. It is in everybody's interest to get that right before pointing fingers.

joshua writes at 02:08:21 09/03/08 - Comment #38488

D: I did watch the video. I can't imagine that the reports of violence on behalf of the protesters was made up. Amy actually mentions some of it, in passing though. They definitely didn't film that. Again looking at the video it appears to me that Amy did little to get arrested and seemed shocked, although I have to say that I've seen people get arrested for little more than what she did on the video. She said that she was trying to intervene - the police in the video asked her to move back and when she didn't follow the instruction, that is when they took her. Again, like I said, I expect the facts to win the day and if the police didn't follow proper procedure then they will be punished.

The problem I have with these videos is that in almost all cases something is missing. I don't trust media who are sympathetic to the subjects they are covering.

joshua writes at 01:54:35 09/03/08 - Comment #38487

D: I think asking whether or not it has occurred before is a red herring. The question isn't whether or not journalists have behaved badly enough to be arrested before; the question is whether or not people understand what freedom of speech is and is not. You'll have to excuse my cynicism regarding the press at large; in my estimation this election cycle has proved beyond doubt that most of them are incompetent and lack professionalism.

I have no reason to believe that she did anything wrong, but I'd sure like to know why she and her crew got arrested. If her crew are facing a felony charge I'd like to know why. We aren't getting all sides of the story at the moment, and are being encouraged to believe that the police overstepped their bounds. We don't know that, and the people who *might* aren't speaking up. I'm not about to drink anybody's Kool-Aid - I want facts regarding the why's regarding the arrests and whether or not the law was applied correctly. What we are getting is a lot of conjecture and for me that isn't acceptable.

In regards to detaining 300 people - if that is the law, then that is the law. I'm not going to debate what the law should be rather than what it is. If journalists are caught up in that I would expect that they were not taking part in the nonsense, but it is entirely reasonable that if they were among the people that got corralled they would have been lumped in with the rest, right or wrong. In either case, I expect the facts will come out and the picture will be a lot clearer. If they were arrested without reason, that will come to light beyond a shadow of any doubt.

dcoffee writes at 01:48:24 09/03/08 - Comment #38486

Guys, I can't even respond to some of that crap. Sorry, I want to be civil, I don't know what to say.

Watch the Democracy Now! broadcast from yesterday :::link::: before you look like a fool.

You can see video of two of the arrests by following that link. Amy has the other two on camera describing their experiences for 10-15 minutes. And if you think they're exaggerating or making stuff up, you're beyond cynical, and I have nothing to say.

To answer your points Josh. I have no sympathy for those who commit violence to express their political point. And it's obvious the RNC protests would be worse, took that as a given. "We need more information to have an intelligent conversation about this." true, watch the video.

Oh yea, and the jailed journalists and video cameras would have been able to capture the confrontation and act as evidence to prove if the cop or the protester was in the wrong. We do need more information eh? Maybe we should train the police what the fucking constitution is for.

joshua writes at 01:40:10 09/03/08 - Comment #38485

PS - last comment, promise.

There is no such thing as an advocate for the little guy anymore - John McCain isn't and neither is Barack Obama. Our country got richer during the Clinton years but who really made the money? There is no middle class advocate. Most of these people can't relate to you and I in this regard D. I'll tell you what I worry about - looking at my dad, who has worked extremely hard all his life and is a blue collar individual, thinking there is no politician out there that is an advocate for his interests. I think my Dad will be worse off than his Dad, without question. The working men and women of our country have been taken advantage of. I can't go further without sounding quasi-Socialist. I'm proud of my dad's work ethic and desire to have provided for our upbringing as a single father. Where are the people looking out for him? Forget party politics - we need to focus on doing right by our fathers and protecting the working people of our country! I'm waiting for politicians who mean it.

dcoffee writes at 01:25:31 09/03/08 - Comment #38484

Thanks for providing the counterpoint, although I don't know where this idea comes from. Are there cases of journalists inciting violence or disorderly conduct that I am not aware of? I think this is a baseless hypothetical defense, and it only serves to create cynicism and distrust of journalists. Their job is hard enough as it is, especially the investigative journalists who cover conflict.

Our courts should eventually figure out who was in the wrong, that is if the Constitution has not been flushed down the Whitehouse toilet. I wrote to Democracy Now! urging them to press charges. But that does not make everything ok.

Here's what happens, if they slap you with a conspiracy to riot charge the law says they can keep you for 36 hours, that does not include holidays and weekends. So if you got arrested last Saturday like 300 people did, even if they have no credible evidence, they can legally keep you till the middle of Wednesday. _You have effectively silenced that journalist and confiscated their equipment for three full days._ It's not just the journalist who suffers, it's the public. Whatever they were planning to cover now remains hidden from us. Amy Goodman put it perfectly;

"What is our role as journalists? It's to be the eyes and ears," says Goodman. "There's a reason our profession is explicitly protected by the Constitution â€" because we're the check and balance on power, the eyes and ears. And when the eyes and ears are closed it's very dangerous for democratic society."

joshua writes at 01:25:23 09/03/08 - Comment #38483

The video is on YouTube - :::link::: - based on what I've read about the arrest you'd think she were treated like a terrorist. Like (e:jason) said I'd like to know why it was that she was arrested. My understanding is that she was trying to come to the aid of her producers, who were arrested on potential felony riot charges. What were her producers up to that would cause that? Are we basically assuming that nobody did any wrong and the police acted inappropriately, without any real evidence one way or another? Looking at the video, she gets arrested in the same fashion that anybody would if they tried to resist (however feebly).

I've read a lot of inane commentary referring to the idea of arresting a journalist. Having a press pass isn't an "I can behave any damn well way I please" pass, and yes, you can be arrested if you break the law and you are a journalist. I suspect ignorance of the law in one fashion or another, but it makes me all the more interested in what Amy and her producers did to provoke this sort of reaction, if in fact they did so. We need more information to have an intelligent conversation about this.

Freedom of speech is not the governing principle behind acting like idiots, provoking police with aggressive behavior and lobbing piss bombs. That is mob behavior and the people behind "Recreate '68" do not know the difference, which is why they dare to complain when they get treated like rioters.

joshua writes at 01:02:39 09/03/08 - Comment #38481

This isn't getting any mainstream traction whatsoever - I wonder why. The arrest reports in the media seem to be centering around the 100 or so anarchists that were arrested after busting through barricades, lobbing piss bombs, generating disorder, etc. - hardly the picture of peaceful protesting, David. Were the Democracy Now! group somehow mixed up with that group of people? I imagine so, since they would almost certainly cover
the protesting. I am betting that they were caught in and around the group doing the things that caused the arrests.

Most people don't have the foggiest clue who Amy Goodman is. And look - compare and contrast the way Obama supposedly treated the protests at the DNC but they are NOT comparable. Firstly, most of these people are sympathetic to Obama despite their radical ideals. Secondly, these same activists don't have nearly the same level of vitriol for Obama than they would for McCain. Why do you refuse to acknowledge that many of these people at the RNC are there specifically to cause trouble and get arrested? You have a very romantic idea about what protesting is and should be, but if you look at it in practice at the RNC it is a far cry from peaceful.

jason writes at 12:38:35 09/03/08 - Comment #38480

What is interesting to me is the lack of information about what the producers did to get arrested. I'm told Democracy Now! is going to post video of that as well, but I haven't seen it. That is very curious to me. Charges are pending, and everyone is assumed to be innocent.

If they are innocent, they certainly can fight it in court and win. If they were roughed up too much, they can sue. There is recourse for these people. Why isn't there a lawsuit already lodged? Until the information gaps are filled, I can't just assume anything. If they were wronged, they can and should fight it and embarrass the department.

There is one thing that I think is lacking here, and that is the understanding that a press pass doesn't make you above the law, or immune to police orders. If an officer tells you to not cross a line, and you go ahead and cross that line, it doesn't matter who you are, you are going to get cuffed. If you get in an officer's face and prevent him from doing his job, especially if you refuse to comply with his requests to back off, you are going to get hit with obstruction charges.

So, I'm just not going to assume anything. The facts WILL come out in the end. They always do. If the department is in the wrong, they deserve to pay big, bottom line, and they should pursue it. If the people involved were simply instigators who refused to comply with lawful orders, they should be accountable and pay the consequences. This is going to be straightened out as long as those involved are serious about it and diligent.

dcoffee writes at 10:06:05 09/02/08 - Comment #38470

Update, today's Democracy Now! includes an interview between Amy Goodman and her two producers who were also arrested, Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar.:::link:::

This is even worse than it seemed. These journalists, all three, and another from the NY Post, were all arrested at the same time. They were recklessly tackled, grabbed, pinned to the ground and handcuffed, all the while shouting that they were Press.

But here's the worst part, not the violence, the fact that they all had their press passes hanging around their necks as they were arrested. Press passes to get on the floor of the RNC require federal background checks and security clearance, and they have your picture on them.

First of all they were handcuffed, despite the fact that they had their Press passes. Then they stood around for some time asking to be released, and asking that their coworkers be released. While everyone was processed and slowly taken away, they must have encountered more than a dozen officers, some of them ranking coordinating officers I'm sure, and nobody realized that it's illegal to detain journalists who are simply doing their job.

But it gets worse, some guy actually came up to them and said, "hmm, press, you won't be needing these today" and yanked the press pass off their neck. He walked away with their passes, and like any good journalist they demanded to know his name, he didn't respond, a nearby officer said "looks like Secret Service". Oh? if it was Secret Service, they should have definitely known the rules, and said, you can't arrest these people, what did they do? But I bet it was some Blackwater crap, hired guns who are above the law.

This whole thing is beyond outrage.

johnallen writes at 09:01:18 09/02/08 - Comment #38464

They have wiped their asses with the Constitution for the last 8 year, what make you think that they would stop now?

The show can be heard in Buffalo on WHLD 1270AM and WBBF 1120AM at 8 a.m. Monday - Friday.

springfaerie writes at 03:31:33 09/02/08 - Comment #38443

The anger that burns through me at the flagrant abuse of first amendment rights is shocking. And let's face it, politics should be more interesting than reality t.v. It's actual reality! Imagine that, huh! Thanks for the info. in the post. It's eye-opening, that's for certain!

If you haven't seen Obama's Speech, I'd definitely recommend it.
The NY Times has the transcript on the same page as the video,

I think the speech was excellent. The whole convention went well. I feel like I know the Democratic party much better, I feel like they understand the problems of everyday people, and they care about making things better. I also feel like I can relate to the Democratic Party more than I ever have before.

The Democratic Party is diverse, but they find common ground and move in the right direction. They don't all agree on things like the death penalty, nuclear power, blackwater, or NAFTA, but they're able to find common ground and keep moving ahead. You have people like John Lewis, an old black congressman who marched alongside MLK and got beaten in the street by cops, you've got Waxman, and Dodd, and Richardson, and Kucinnich, and Jim Webb. This party looks like America, it's not a bunch of fat cats who can't relate to what's actually going on in the lives of Americans. They feel a duty and a responsibility to look out for the common good.

In Obama's speech he gave specifics on where he stands and what he wants to do in Washington. He also attacked the Republican policies point blank. He totally redefined the debate. But beyond that, he reminded us what makes America great. When we work together, for a common purpose, we can do great things. Let's get back to that basic American idea, that we want to help create a better future for our children. Let's see the Republicans answer that one, do you want a better future for our children or not? If you do, we need to take action on better schools, global warming, healthcare, the middle class, voting integrity, international respect, keeping jobs in America and being a self-sufficient nation, where those who work hard can get ahead.

Let's stop dividing ourselves into categories and realize that we are all Americans, we're in this together, and if we work together we will succeed.

Some of my favorite quotes:

"through hard work and sacrifice, each of us can pursue our individual dreams but still come together as one American family, to ensure that the next generation can pursue their dreams as well."

"These challenges are not all of government's making. But the failure to respond is a direct result of a broken politics in Washington and the failed presidency [ouch] of George W. Bush. America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this."

"the record's clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush 90 percent of the time. Sen. McCain likes to talk about judgment, but really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush was right more than 90 percent of the time? I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a 10 percent chance on change." -zing!

"Now, I don't believe that Senator McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of Americans. I just think he doesn't know."

"For over two decades, he's subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy - give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society, but what it really means is - you're on your own. Out of work? Tough luck. No health care? The market will fix it. Born into poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps - even if you don't have boots. You're on your own. Well it's time for them to own their failure." [D-Pumps fist]

Fundamental Point: "You see, we Democrats have a very different measure of what constitutes progress in this country.
We measure progress by how many people can find a job that pays the mortgage; whether you can put away a little extra money at the end of each month so that you can someday watch your child receive her diploma ... We measure the strength of our economy not by the number of billionaires we have or the profits of the Fortune 500, but by whether someone with a good idea can take a risk and start a business, or whether the waitress who lives on tips can take a day off to look after a sick kid without losing her job - an economy that honors the dignity of work. The fundamentals we use to measure economic strength are whether we are living up to that fundamental promise that has made this country great "

[Talks about his less than privileged family, well worth watching] then - "I don't know what kind of lives John McCain thinks that celebrities lead, but this has been mine. These are my heroes. Theirs are the stories that shaped me. And it is on their behalf that I intend to win this election and keep our promise alive as President of the United States." [crumples the elitist caricature into a ball and tosses McCain's money in the garbage]

"It's a promise that says each of us has the freedom to make of our own lives what we will, but that we also have the obligation to treat each other with dignity and respect.
It's a promise that says the market should reward drive and innovation and generate growth, but that businesses should live up to their responsibilities to create American jobs, look out for American workers, and play by the rules of the road."

"government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves - protect us from harm and provide every child a decent education; keep our water clean and our toys safe; invest in new schools and new roads and new science and technology." [pops the conservatives balloon, and drain's the bathtub Norquist wanted to drown the government in]

Our government should work for us, not against us. It should help us, not hurt us. It should ensure opportunity not just for those with the most money and influence, but for every American who's willing to work.
That's the promise of America - the idea that we are responsible for ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation; the fundamental belief that I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper.
That's the promise we need to keep. That's the change we need right now. So let me spell out exactly what that change would mean if I am President. " [see below for abbreviated platform]

"The times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same partisan playbook. So let us agree that patriotism has no party. I love this country, and so do you, and so does John McCain. The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have served the United States of America."

"What has also been lost is our sense of common purpose - our sense of higher purpose. And that's what we have to restore."

"If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from.
You make a big election about small things.
And you know what - it's worked before. Because it feeds into the cynicism we all have about government. When Washington doesn't work, all its promises seem empty. If your hopes have been dashed again and again, then it's best to stop hoping, and settle for what you already know."

"I get it. I realize that I am not the likeliest candidate for this office. I don't fit the typical pedigree, and I haven't spent my career in the halls of Washington.But I stand before you tonight because all across America something is stirring. What the nay-sayers don't understand is that this election has never been about me. It's been about you. "

"You understand that in this election, the greatest risk we can take is to try the same old politics with the same old players and expect a different result. You have shown what history teaches us - that at defining moments like this one, the change we need doesn't come from Washington. Change comes to Washington. Change happens because the American people demand it"

"This country of ours has more wealth than any nation, but that's not what makes us rich. We have the most powerful military on Earth, but that's not what makes us strong. Our universities and our culture are the envy of the world, but that's not what keeps the world coming to our shores.
Instead, it is that American spirit - that American promise - that pushes us forward even when the path is uncertain; that binds us together in spite of our differences"

"That promise is our greatest inheritance. It's a promise I make to my daughters when I tuck them in at night, and a promise that you make to yours - a promise that has led immigrants to cross oceans and pioneers to travel west; a promise that led workers to picket lines, and women to reach for the ballot.
And it is that promise that forty five years ago today, brought Americans from every corner of this land to stand together on a Mall in Washington, before Lincoln's Memorial, and hear a young preacher from Georgia speak of his dream. "

"At this moment, in this election, we must pledge once more to march into the future. Let us keep that promise - that American promise - and in the words of Scripture hold firmly, without wavering, to the hope that we confess."

Barrack Obama's Platform in incomplete sentences:
"stop giving tax breaks to corporations that ship our jobs overseas, and I will start giving them to companies that create good jobs right here in America."

"cut taxes - for 95 percent of all working families."

"in ten years, we will finally end our dependence on oil from the Middle East."

"meet our moral obligation to provide every child a world-class education, because it will take nothing less to compete in the global economy. Michelle and I are only here tonight because we were given a chance at an education. And I will not settle for an America where some kids don't have that chance."

"Washington has been talking about our oil addiction for the last 30 years (OPEC Price tripled in 70's), and John McCain has been there for 26 of them. In that time, he's said no to higher fuel-efficiency standards for cars, no to investments in renewable energy, no to renewable fuels."

"drilling is a stopgap measure, not a long-term solution. Not even close."

"As president, I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology, and find ways to safely harness nuclear power. I'll help our auto companies retool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America."

"invest $150 billion over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy ... an investment that will lead to new industries and five million new jobs that pay well and can't ever be outsourced."

"If you have health care, my plan will lower your premiums. If you don't, you'll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves. And as someone who watched my mother argue with insurance companies while she lay in bed dying of cancer, I will make certain those companies stop discriminating against those who are sick and need care the most."

"Now is the time to change our bankruptcy laws, so that your pensions are protected ahead of CEO bonuses; and the time to protect Social Security for future generations."

"Now, many of these plans will cost money, which is why I've laid out how I'll pay for every dime - by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don't help America grow. But I will also go through the federal budget, line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work and making the ones we do need work better and cost less - because we cannot meet twenty-first century challenges with a twentieth century bureaucracy." - good start

"we must also admit that fulfilling America's promise will require more than just money. It will require a renewed sense of responsibility from each of us to recover what John F. Kennedy called our "intellectual and moral strength."

"We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country. Don't tell me that Democrats won't keep us safe. The Bush-McCain foreign policy has squandered the legacy that generations of Americans - Democrats and Republicans - have built, and we are to restore that legacy." [Long Convincing national security part, basically says history has proved him right and McCain wrong]

"I will rebuild our military to meet future conflicts. But I will also renew the tough, direct diplomacy that can prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons."

"We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country. The reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than for those plagued by gang-violence in Cleveland, but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals. I know there are differences on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person they love in the hospital and to live lives free of discrimination. Passions fly on immigration, but I don't know anyone who benefits when a mother is separated from her infant child or an employer undercuts American wages by hiring illegal workers. This too is part of America's promise - the promise of a democracy where we can find the strength and grace to bridge divides and unite in common effort."

(e:joshua) trying to describe "progressive politics" is like a meat eater trying to explain vegetarianism.

How about discussing McInsane's policies, (e:joshua) ? Oh right, since it's more of The Same, we don't have to get any specifics; we've seen them in action over the last 8 years. Lol....

johnallen writes at 05:35:28 08/29/08 - Comment #38341

It was an awesome speech,very fitting for the 45 anniversary of "The Dream". This is an awesome time to be an American.

dcoffee writes at 02:43:36 08/29/08 - Comment #38337

I think the speech was as specific as it could be without putting people to sleep. If you want specifics, he has huge detailed documents on his website, 50 pages here, 20 pages there for specific proposals.

I think Obama was firm in his convictions, and didn't compromise to Republican terms. His platform is different than mine, but he didn't bend himself to fit the bogus polls or to appease people. And in that way, he stuck to his guns. He just sees where people are coming from and tries to build consensus and move forward. That is something I value.

Obama's position is the one that most Americans can agree on. Government serves a purpose for us, and to exist government needs taxes. That tax structure should help the middle class grow, and provide smart kids with a chance to make something out of their lives and contribute to America. It's not about income redistribution, it's about America being stronger when we work together.

jim writes at 02:39:35 08/29/08 - Comment #38336

That AP article is crap. He mentioned just about as many specifics as you could in such a short time. The article even says as much past the lede. The article's title does not match its contents.

The Republicans would call him vaporous if he just talked about ideals, and academic if he spent all his time on minutia of details. He hit just the right balance between the two.

And, that article says that saying "We all put our country first" is a sharp attack on McCain - I mean, really? Really? If that's sharp then Republicans are wusses.

joshua writes at 02:25:50 08/29/08 - Comment #38335

You can't call it a summary because it isn't! =P

You might find this article interesting, or perhaps enraging. From the AP - Obama speech still lacked specifics - :::link:::

This isn't progressive politics we saw last night. Compromises on gun control? Compromises on abortion? I don't think so! When I (and you) said that progressives need to stick to their guns, this isn't what either of us had in mind. Progressives have never compromised on core beliefs. Does anybody really believe that Obama would support meaningful limitations on abortion? The problem with Obama's position is that in most cases it isn't his side doing the compromising. That isn't a spirit of bipartisanship and shouldn't be considered as such. He mentions tax cuts for 95% of Americans but doesn't mention how he'll do it - by eliminating the Bush tax cuts, which is a de facto tax increase. He is trying to package redistribution of wealth as a mainstream view. I think time will tell how well it all holds up.

Besides obvious criticisms though, I think the speech served its purpose in lifting up Democrats. We'll see how it plays out. Overall I have to say I enjoyed it, but felt that it wasn't one of his best.

dcoffee writes at 02:14:50 08/29/08 - Comment #38334

hell, he made me comfortable with his positions, even the ones I disagree with. I can see that he is sincere about it, and not just politicking. So maybe we can go halfway on some things, instead of being stuck in a stalemate. I realized that this is going to take a while, and this election is just the first step.

jason writes at 02:09:38 08/29/08 - Comment #38332

Ha! He DID move more towards the center with that speech, as we spoke about before. I thought Obama's speech was very effective. Talking about finding common ground on some of the touchiest issues of the day? He may get hammered for that by some of the ultras, but I really loved hearing that. You characterized it perfectly I think, pragmatic Liberalism.

I'm not going to go into much detail about the convention itself, but so far I'm pretty impressed.

the Democrats seem like the ones who can honestly understand the problems of the Middle-Class. They know what we're dealing with, and they have good solutions that will to get us there.

Their platform can be summarized in 2 points.
Rebuild the American Dream
restore America's standing in the world

The American dream is not based on what you can buy, it's not about having a house and a car and a pool. Everybody has their own dream, and the promise of America is that every child should have the opportunity to reach that dream if they try. This is not a society of classes, America is the place where those who work hard get ahead in life. That is a basic American value, and it has been under assault for the past 8 years.

Restoring America's standing in the world. "People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." It is NOT in our self-interest to be isolated and despised by other countries. To be respected we need to lead by example, and quit yelling at other countries to do as we say, not as we do.

Here's the great side effect of this campaign; They are empowering the American people, building efficacy, and convincing us that if we work for it, we can create a better America together. That's powerful stuff, and it goes beyond just selling the Democratic party, it's bigger than that. It says Americans determine the course of our own country.

The one thing that's missing from the message so far...
Adopting a progressive platform is in America's self-interest.

We need and educated public so we can innovate better and faster than the rest of the world.

We need smart poor kids to have the chance to get out of the ghetto and put their great ideas to use for America.

We need renewable energy, because we know everyone is going to want it, and if we have the best product, made in America, then we win economically.

We need allies and international laws, to settle disagreements between nations. So we don't have to send our ambitious young people off to be killed, maimed, and mentally devastated. Our military people should be at home raising their families, instead of leaving them to worry night and day about your safety.

We need to end the War in Iraq, because it is bankrupting our country, as we borrow money to pay for a mistake.

We need universal healthcare, because at some point everybody needs medical attention, and nobody should lose their house because of a medical bill. Families should be able to focus on raising their kids. And not have to work two jobs just to afford for-profit health insurance.

We need to rebuild our infrastructure, because we don't want bridges to fall down while we drive over them, or levees to break and flood cities. The government has a job to do, and it would employ millions of Americans.

We need a strong middle class, because that's what drives our economy, and helps people realize their American Dream.

Americans are a proud people. We can accomplish anything. We're smart ambitious and innovative. We've been on the cutting edge many times in our history. We've invented incredible things, and achieved great progress. As a nation, we need to tap into that American spirit, and trust the American people. We need a government that believes in us and partners with us, instead of a selfish government that hides from us and deceives us.

If I were a Democrat I'd be appealing to the practical side, as well as the proud side of America.

We'll see what Barrack Obama says tonight. I liked Bill Clinton's speach the best so far, though Hillary, Michelle, Kucinnich, and Joe Biden were also good.

I'm glad the Clinton Obama primary battle is over. Now Obama can run on President Clinton's record of success too, and he doesn't have to run against both political establishments. He can focus on what the Republicans have done since they seized all the wheels of power. Everything has gone wrong over the past 8 years, and because of that the Democrats have a platform that comes with empirical evidence. And if they do succeed in empowering the American people, they'd better stick to the high road, or we'll hold them accountable too.

I was in SUNY Fredonia, and my last year there was a big expense increase, and I remember a lot of grumbling about Pataki. I'm pretty offended that the Fed hasn't lowered interest rates on student loans though.

Libertad: I voted for Obama once, in the primary. And because of the stupid electoral college I know NYS is a Blue state, and I don't need to fear helping John McCain by voting for an Independent party. I view an Obama presidency as a bold step in the right direction, but it won't magically fix everything, people need to stay alert and involved to make sure the government makes the changes we need. He has a good platform with a lot of consensus, but I know it will be a lot tougher to work out the details in Washington. If we want any of these promises to come true, we need to fight for them, and call our congress people to make sure they vote the way we need them to. I guess I'd say I love Cynthia McKinney, and I always vote Independent Party, but Obama has a chance at my vote.

jason writes at 09:49:19 08/29/08 - Comment #38309

While it's true that the trustees say how much tuition will increase, they still are subject to the limits which the state legislature will impose on them financially through state aid. The politicians still dictate what that amount will be.

So while trustees can say they want a 1000 increase, if the state doesn't give them the money they want to run the SUNY system they have to find another avenue, which was the case when I was in college. Anyone remember the explosion in fees in the late 90's?

libertad writes at 09:05:27 08/29/08 - Comment #38307

dcoffee--Does this journal reinforce your support for Mckinney or are you going back to Obama?

Josh-- consider the conservative influence on SUNY and how much tuition has gone up under Pataki's leadership.

"Both Mr. Cuomo and Mr. Pataki, like many governors, appointed like-minded trustees. Yet Mr. Cuomo's appointees fought with him to defend the university from cuts. Mr. Pataki's have not. He chose trustees who said they wanted to be change agents, not merely guardians of Mr. Rockefeller's SUNY." source :::link:::

About the rising college costs, I found out this tidbit while researching refinancing my college loan. The interest rates on college loans have steadily gone up since I graduated, they're around 8% now. At a time when the other interest rates are dropping, and you need a college education more than ever, the federal government has in fact made it more costly to get a loan. People who don't have to borrow can be mad at the universities, but if you're like most people shrinking federal grants and higher interest rates are your biggest problem.

I hope democrats have the confidence to stick to their guns this time around, and take an example from their progressive base. And I hope the progressive base considers November the beginning of their movement instead of the culmination. I'd say the reason Democrats fold once elected is the corrupt election system and the influence of private dollars.

Jason: the bottom up idea is key. I give a hell yea to that one. I agree with that on many levels, including states rights, states should be a mini laboratory for policy testing. And from the perspective of American democracy in general. Nothing starts at the top.

I also think progressives are digging in for the long haul, finally. No election will solve our problems, it takes our effort, and the people can never take their eye off the government. and for me, participatory democracy is more important than any party or election.

jason writes at 03:05:37 08/28/08 - Comment #38281

Thanks D. You know what, I risk trouble at home for this, but there is something I have to admit I admire about the progressive movement, and this is something I think everyone can agree on as it is pretty easy to observe.

I am NOT talking about the politicians here, rather normal folks like you and I.

Progressives embrace the "bottom to top" view of how ideas should be put into action. They are eager to roll up their sleeves and work hard towards the goal of not only implementing their solutions, but also trying to get people to sway in their direction.

Conservatives, and I'm telling you it's one of the reasons I left the party, WILL NOT behave this way. No, if you are not on the wing, it isn't that they have to work harder to earn votes. They don't want to roll up their sleeves. They expect that they can do NOTHING, and that everyone else in the R umbrella has to kiss their ring and capitulate in every circumstance because they're just that fucking important. Screw that!!!

joshua writes at 02:43:39 08/28/08 - Comment #38280

I thought Clinton was a stiff - I felt it was half-hearted. Biden though, he was a spectacle. He was a brilliant entertainer and drove home a lot of solid points. Biden is the only one with the guts and the cred to be able to attack John McCain on issues that Obama is weak on. My only nitpicking this time was his mentioning of rising college costs. Who is responsible for that? It sure as hell isn't the GOP or GWB! Don't make me use the "L" word referring to those who have administrated colleges for eons.

Otherwise though, looking at it from a broad perspective, I think the convention has been a success. It will be interesting to see what Barack Obama says - I'll be taking notes.

D you mention something I've read from you before - that progressives have to stand by their ideas. I don't think you can force the GOP to debate on progressive terms, ever... they don't have to and have never had to. On the other hand though, progressive politicians need to stick to their guns more. Say what you believe and stand behind it! I think people like yourself, and other regular folks who are progressives do stick with their guns but the politicians have not. I have an incredibly cynical reason why (when they do, they lose, which is why the only two-term Democrat in the last few decades was a centrist) but it is deeper than that. If progressives can't win this one, they never will.

dcoffee writes at 02:11:14 08/28/08 - Comment #38278

Jason, you bring up a lot of good points. I think tonight you will hear a lot more specifics about what Barrack Obama would do as president. So far, there's been a lot of "I know what you're going through" Tonight I'm expecting a lot of "Here's how we're going to fix it".

I also understand that Obama has to build on the most popular elements of the Democratic platform. I still think progressives have to stand by their ideas, and make sure we define the debate, and force republicans to address our terms. But I also see that change is going to happen step by step. We try the ideas, succeed, and build on it next year. It's going to take dedication and time to get there. You can't really outlaw Health insurance companies overnight,or fix the election system quick. It's up to people to keep the pressure on, and it's up to politicians to build consensus and take the laws one step forward.

jason writes at 01:19:37 08/28/08 - Comment #38275

In general I think the speeches I've seen have been good, at least as far as character witnesses are concerned. Democratics are experts at playing on emotions and tugging at heart strings. I've been entertained, and that isn't a criticism this time. I trust Biden more than I trust Obama, actually, when it comes to being a wise and prudent leader, but fresh blood is needed I suppose, and is more compatible with the party message.

The one criticism I heard on BBC Radio last night was that there hasn't been a whole lot of meat to chew on. It's been, oh, America is in trouble, America is terrible, McSame, 4 more years of Bush....ad nauseum. What about policy? I agree with this criticism, and I'm hopeful (probably foolishly so) that the king of soaring rhetoric will give us more when he speaks tonight.

I think that the Obama campaign is going to be only as Progressive as they believe is acceptable to moderates and independents who are going to decide the race. He has spoken many times about UHC, Iraq Withdrawal, Energy Independence, Infrastructure Development...things you've listed in your journal. There are elements of the progressive faction that are well represented.

However, Obama's campaign is savvy enough to know that running as an inflexible ideologue will result in failure. Not even the progressive vehicle for power, the Democratic Party, accepted the only "real" principled left winger Kucinich. He called himself the "center" of the party which turned out to be false. Clearly, the party and the nation don't want a hard core progressive, but that doesn't mean that the whole of the ideology will be scrapped. You win some and you lose some, and you fight on.

We missed cocktail hour, came back got a drink and then we were introduced.

The Tent

Invitation and Coffee Party Favors. I designed the invitation, seating chart and a bunch of stuff.

The Seating Chart

Officially introduced.

had a Vegetarian dinner, Lasagna! Veggies straight out of Dad's garden, and fresh bread. It was really good

The Cake. Funny thing is, we had no idea what the cake looked like. They brought it out, we moved the leaves, and cut it. Luckily the photographer got a picture for us so we could actually look at it.

It was Carrot Cake, made by a friend of the family from scratch, SO friggen tasty. We actually didn't really taste the cake till the next day either, we just had that bite on the plate here.

Oh yea, I had poison Ivy the whole time. We came up a week before the wedding to do some landscaping, there was poison ivy in the garden. I had the cream in my pocket the whole day.

Old School crew

Kenny's Speech

It was a really nice speech, Long enough to be meaningful, and touching for everyone, but not too long, not written down, and he was pretty nervous, needed some moral support from Scott, and a few drinks to get ready. It went something like this, "I've known David for a long time, and he's always been there for me...." Then he gave us both a hug, and spilled his drink all over the dance floor.

So I got a napkin and said, 'don't worry Kenny, I'm here for you man, I got your back'.

Our First Dance.

We danced to Elvis, I can't help falling in love with you. We listened to at least 50 potential first dance songs, we wanted to do Frank Sinatra or Coldplay, but this song just fit best with our story.

Dancing with Mom. We danced to Stevie Wonder, Sunshine of my Life. It was fun, my mom likes to dance.

M and Dad danced to Fleetwood Mac, Landslide. Cool song, her dad never dances, so it was a big joke getting him out on the dancefloor. Oh, and he went inside and changed into shorts after dinner, so we had to get him back into his brand new one and only suit before dancing. But he rocked the siut for the rest of the night.

View from the Tent

The Older Cousins Group

Yes, I'm dancing with my camera on, so what :)

Conga Line! I'll take that over the electric slide any day. I've been to enough weddings that when the DJ played the right song I started to Conga. It wasn't even the usual 'feelin hot hot hot' song. Fun Times

The Conga Line gets everyone on the dancefloor! I circled everyone up just in time.

Molly was on the Dancefloor 100% of the time, she only missed one song to go out to the pond for the reflection shot.
Dad in the Background Rocking out.

Candlelit Reflection in the pond

M and brother spinning

Dad was having a good ol time, we were totally surprised to see him anywhere near the dancefloor.

Dog Joins party, at about 9:30

I'm thinking the song might have been Old Time Rock and Roll. But this just makes it official, we've made it to the drunken silly part of the night. Not every wedding gets to that stage, actually some weddings start silly and drunk before the ceremony :).

The setting, on the pond, some people moved chairs around and made themselves at home next to the water. It was a great spot.

Fireworks for the end, Uncle Bob likes fireworks.

2:30am everyone left is sitting around the fire, with kegs nearby. Dad finally decides to call it a night. M still has flowers in her hair.

3:30am, M keeps talking about seeing the sun rise, I think she doesn't want it to end. The day went so well, who wants to end it. M Brother and I are the last 3 standing.

Dawn came about 5:30am, and in the light we noticed that the place was a mess! So we tidied up a bit before heading up to the cupola on top of the barn for a view of the sunrise.

Last Photo, Molly and I heading to bed at Dawn, Brother was inside doing dishes or something. Time to get some shuteye before heading east to the woods.

It was organic fair trade coffee of course :) "Deans Beans" Birdwatchers blend. We taste tested some before we bought 175 :)

tinypliny writes at 08:18:00 08/27/08 - Comment #38198

Thanks for sharing, once again! The photos are so perfect! What a COOL reception!! I love that picture of (e:mmtornow) and her brother spinning. It's so funny and sweet. The invites and chart are so apt. They go beautifully with the wedding theme - the tree of life. Just out of curiosity, what kind of coffee did you guys give out? Nice concept! :)

metalpeter writes at 06:26:20 08/26/08 - Comment #38188

It looks like it was a great time, I love how the floor in the tent looks, oh yeah and Bonfires are all ways a good time.

dcoffee writes at 04:19:25 08/26/08 - Comment #38182

Aww man, I never heard the U2 cover, there's a UB40 cover or something that's not very good. Sorry no bachelor party, my best man was in Chicago with the Navy until the day of the wedding. You wouldn't find any strippers there anyway ;)

carolinian writes at 03:25:20 08/26/08 - Comment #38177

When do we get to see the batchelor party pics? ;)

drew writes at 02:53:31 08/26/08 - Comment #38175

Great pics. And your song choice for a first dance was good, too (although I would have used u2's cover of said song. It's awesome.)

joshua writes at 02:42:45 08/26/08 - Comment #38174

Well done! This is one of the more personal ceremonies I've ever seen.

I can't take it anymore. Seems like the Obama Campaign is resorting to conventional wisdom, moving to the center, compromising, watching the polls, and changing his position to appease the schmucks who make up their minds based on TV adds.

Telling people what they want to hear will fuck you over. You can't change the game of politics, without changing the game of presidential campaigning. Being honest and truthful isn't enough. Registering millions of new voters isn't enough. Fighting the smears isn't enough.

Here's the problem, The largest voting block in America IS THE ONE THAT STAYS FUCKING HOME! It's the young voters and the cynics. How did Obama get the nomination? By inspiring millions of people to volunteer their time. By making people feel like they could be part of the solution. Making us feel like we had the power to take the country back. The new generation of voters is ready to see some serious change in this country, and we're willing to do it our fucking selves. Those are the people you need.

Oh sure, you can register a million new voters, but come election day, they need to be passionate about their candidate, not just scared of the other guy. Or else they won't bother.

I don't know who Obama is talking to but he's getting some bad advice. Remember the Gas Tax holiday? Yea, he called it a sham, and got enough respect to bounce over Clinton. But today we're talking about Offshore Drilling, and suddenly Obama is an appeaser. The Oil Comapnies have leases to 100 million acres of land, 33 million of which are offshore But they aren't drilling because they make more money when supply is tight. Force McCain to address that question, are you with the Oil Companies or with the American people? But instead Obama wimps out, drilling should be part of the energy formula blah blah... If the oil companies still have lands where they can get oil they don't need more, we can talk about that when they've used what they already have. Taking on the oil companies makes you a hero, thanks for blowing that one.

Add the FISA bill to the list of wimp-outs, and the bullish rhetoric toward Iran. And you start to look like the same old same old. That doesn't get my vote, it doesn't get me to volunteer to phonebank from my home, or pick up a friend on the way to the polling booth, or to sit at a table on campus to register voters. And it won't get my father in-law back to Pennsylvania as a campaign volunteer either. Now you start to see why the ambiguous middle doesn't matter.

Me, you think I'll vote for him anyway, I'm a New York Democrat now, so why not take my vote as a given, and start campaigning for the center. Actually no, I'm one of those crazy motherfuckers who will vote for Cynthia McKinney just to prove a point. Wasting my vote? Yea right, she will appreciate it more than the chosen two. And I'll keep voting with my finger in the air until I get my third party.

Josh The studies that I cited are compiled by Liberal outlets, but the data and the surveys is as objective as possible. This is public information, we used the same stuff in my political science classes, it's not like any of those "Fox news polls", I've seen some of those questions, very leading.
You are right that elections are much more accurate than polls at showing American preferences. But what about the people who don't vote, I have many friends who I cannot convince to go out and vote, they are straight up cynical about the whole system. I want the democrats, or somebody, to connect with that group. What are their issues?

joshua writes at 03:23:52 08/22/08 - Comment #38046

I would suggest that national elections bear out the mood of the electorate over the years in the best fashion. Democrats have always been more effective locally than they have been nationally, and the opposite is the case for Republicans. You can imagine what I think about The Nation and Media Matters, David. Do you want me to start quoting polls from The Weekly Standard? =P

I don't think progressives can blame Republicans for their lack of effectiveness. Liberals have been bad at the political game for a long time - in 2004 I heard Lewis Black rip a 10-minute comedy piece on the subject for crying out loud. There is a kernal of truth to what you are saying, but what I'd suggest is that progressives have to do a better job of defining their positions. Just don't blame the electorate when they don't agree with you! Obama is watering it down now, which you've talked about. You are asking why - I am telling you that it is because he knows the aggressive progressive agenda you are talking about is not palatable to the American middle class that he needs to win. McCain is crushing him in the middle right now. The people aren't stupid - they know what Barack Obama stands for. Liberals for a long time have never given voters credit for thinking for themselves because, well, they lose all the time.

(e:drew) - there was nothing unconstitutional about that bill. In fact the federal version (The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002) was identical and passed with no complaint from the likes of NARAL, Ted Kennedy and other staunch pro-choice advocates. At the time Obama complained about the lack of a "neutrality clause" - when it was added he voted down the bill anyway. Incidentally it was the neutrality clause (it guaranteed that the new act wouldn't affect erosion of the right to an abortion) that guaranteed broad support. This is why it is so shocking - every pro-abortion Senator in Congress voted for a bill identical to that which Obama voted down.

When Obama ran for Senate he claimed that he voted it down because it lacked the neutrality clause. It was a lie - anyone can see in the record that the language was included in 2001 and he voted it down in three straight sessions going into 2003. You can see why it is a point of comedy for me when the Obammunists think this is a smear.

Anyway, since linking to partisan sources is now credible (only teasing, D) here is an article on the subject - :::link:::

dcoffee writes at 03:19:59 08/22/08 - Comment #38045

Sorry to ramble so much, but let me get back to this, since I don't feel like like we can define how conservative or liberal America is anyway.

When you drift toward the center you end up with a confused platform, and you don't inspire people to work hard for your campaign. Your supporters start to wonder if you really support their issue or not. Democratic campaigns have failed time and again because of their focus on the center. The republican base is inspired to support their candidate, and they bring friends to the pols. The Democratic base is sitting at home thinking that no matter how they vote nothing will change. That is the biggest problem for democrats, supporters stay home, or if you're like me, you stick to your ideals and vote Green. Democrats need people like me, and my Father-in-law if they expect to win, ever.

drew writes at 02:58:30 08/22/08 - Comment #38043

right on, d

drew writes at 02:57:54 08/22/08 - Comment #38042

The vote was against an unnecessary, unconstitutional bill. Obama would have been wise to simply not vote, but you can hardly use this to say he was in favor of infanticide. He's against bad legislation.

dcoffee writes at 02:45:09 08/22/08 - Comment #38041

I'd say the problem is that progressive values have been defined by the republicans running against them. They have been very good at creating stereotypes, coming up with catch phrases like "socialized medicine" and otherwise demonizing progressive issues. Progressives haven't had a clear platform for many years. It's not that Americans don't agree with progressives, they just don't know what we stand for. But Americans in general are progressive, I know I have to qualify that statement so.. Research/numbers :::link::::::link::: of course it's in the liberal press but you can still read the poll questions and see numbers.

joshua writes at 02:24:33 08/22/08 - Comment #38040

"No I don't want to give Bush my tax money, he will blow it on Halliburton." D that is ridiculous!

You are correct that Republicans have never had to bow to the center to win. That is because they don't have to - Democrats could never copy the strategy and expect to win. The reason is because conservative politics have been tried and tested, and win national elections regularly. Progressive politics do not. It could be argued that middle America relates to traditionalist values far more than they relate to "San Francisco" values. Actually, I'll go ahead and say that I'd wager that is true.

(e:drew) - do you really believe that the infanticide vote should be disregarded? They are talking about killing babies that survive abortion. He voted against a bill that would have stopped such a practice in Illinois.

Really. What about all of this is so misleading - did me make the vote or not? If anything is a red herring it is the neutrality clause! All of this looks fairly devastating.

drew writes at 01:49:13 08/22/08 - Comment #38036

That "infanticide" vote is a pure red herring.

dcoffee writes at 01:48:49 08/22/08 - Comment #38035

Oh, I forgot one, "Tax = bad" "small government = good" The dominant logic is that the government is the problem. People forget that a competent and transparent government can actually solve problems, and spend our collective resources wisely. The New Deal programs are the only thing keeping Americans comfortable enough so we don't start rioting in the streets.

No I don't want to give Bush my tax money, he will blow it on Halliburton. But I think Americans would have gladly accepted a tax increase to pay for the war. Americans will give money to support worthy causes.

dcoffee writes at 01:37:40 08/22/08 - Comment #38031

Republicans don't win elections by appeasing the center. Let's take 2004 Bush and Kerry. Did Bush wiggle at all on Gay Marriage, the War, Tax Cuts for big Business, Abortion, Healthcare? He didn't wiggle, he stuck to the issues of his supporters, and they worked hard for him. Josh you're exactly right on this, Obama does need to "convince middle America". But the term is "Convince them", not appease them, cause then you look like you either don't have faith in your own ideas, or you just don't know what the hell you're doing. Remember, Kerry was the flip-flopper.

You can convince middle America that you have the best answer, but you don't do it by suddenly watering down your idea and meeting your opponent halfway. Sure you have to do that in the Senate, but in a campaign you need to defend your own agenda, and make your opponent justify why they oppose your good ideas.

I'd say, the Republicans have gotten this far by motivating their core supporters based on hot button wedge issues. Not by drifting to the center. That's why the pundit declared "center" has moved so far toward republican dogma.

"tax cuts for big business creates jobs" "military muscle is the only way to defend ourselves" "the market will naturally take care of global warming" "Free market healthcare is the best in the world"
Sounds like the Right has done a better job of telling the center what to believe. In 2004 Democrats didn't even have a platform outside of abortion and gay marriage, Democrats need do get their populism back.

joshua writes at 01:20:03 08/22/08 - Comment #38028

It is an interesting strategy but in my view it is a loser in a general election. In primaries progressives can win all day long doing that, particularly because of the financial clout that liberal organizations and the blogosphere now wield. I truly believe that the bigwigs fear DailyKos, which is why they work so hard to keep them happy. There is some shame in that, though - if you look at the comments left by many of the readers of the site some of these people are subhuman.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - Obama will not win without winning the center, particularly this year and particularly because he is so far behind McCain in centrist core issues. Independents are going to choose the President this time around, but I don't think progressives should worry too much about what Obama is saying. Take a look at his voting record (allow me to snicker for a second - take a look at that infanticide legislation in ILL!) and you'll see that progressives have nothing to worry about. National Journal rated him the most liberal senator. He is not a centrist, but he has to convince independent voters that he's trustworthy. He's losing that battle at the moment.

drew writes at 01:02:41 08/22/08 - Comment #38025

oops. I guess I am with DCoffee, not ajay.

drew writes at 01:01:50 08/22/08 - Comment #38024

I'm with ajay in that a politician doesn't necessarily have to move to the center if he/she can register/get out the many people who don't vote.

This is a difficult and unconventional strategy, but it is the one that won Obama the primary. I wish he had chosen to stick with it in the general election.

paul writes at 12:15:07 08/22/08 - Comment #38014

I totally agree with you.

ajay writes at 11:39:07 08/22/08 - Comment #38010

(e:dcoffee) , from what I've heard, there's a hardcore block of (who else but) Republican congressmen who are pro-drilling. They will not accept any clean-energy initiative unless there's more drilling.

So the choices are: throw them a bone and get them to go along, or do nothing.

Obama is willing to throw them a bone if they'll agree to some massive investment in clean energy.

Of course, the real blame lies with the fucking retards who continue to vote these assholes into office based on the "ooohh... the terrrurists are gonna git us!" argument.

Vote on policies and ideas, people. Not on the label "Republican" or "Democrat".

joshua writes at 11:26:08 08/22/08 - Comment #38008

D -

Obama is moving to the center because he has to. He needs to convince middle America, not you! Swing voters will decide the election and I think the left, once again, has generally overestimated the popularity of progressive politics. I'd hang in there and not worry if I were you. We all know if he gets elected he'll throw middle America under the bus and pursue all the liberal policies that attracted you to him in the first place.

mrmike writes at 10:36:50 08/22/08 - Comment #38002

The zingers have been always been the case of late. None of what we've heard so far in the four years of campaigning (or so it seems) is going to figure into the election which is sad. You want more than sound bites.You want to believe in some hope, that there is some reason it won't be the same old, same old. Make you want to volunteer where the election will matter.

james writes at 09:49:05 08/22/08 - Comment #38000

I have to say, i am disappointed with his post-primary performance. It is such a different game though. There is almost no discussion of policy and it seems like a contest of who can spin the best zinger. booo.